Mount Vernon, Ohio family values: Child Abuse and Assault & Battery

[DRoseDARs]

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20080620/ap_on_re_us/teacher_bible

Ohio board votes to ax teacher accused of branding

By DOUG WHITEMAN, Associated Press Writer 36 minutes ago

COLUMBUS, Ohio - The school board of a small central Ohio community voted unanimously Friday to fire a teacher accused of preaching his Christian beliefs despite staff complaints and using a device to burn the image of a cross on students' arms.

School board members voted 5-0 to fire Mount Vernon Middle School science teacher John Freshwater. Board attorney David Millstone said Freshwater is entitled to a hearing to challenge the dismissal.

Freshwater denies wrongdoing and will request such a hearing, the teacher's attorney, Kelly Hamilton, told the Mount Vernon News.

School board members met a day after the consulting firm H.R. On Call Inc. released its report on the teacher's case.

The report came a week after a family filed a lawsuit in U.S. District Court in Columbus against Freshwater and the school district, saying Freshwater burned a cross on a child's arm that remained for three or four weeks.

Freshwater's friend Dave Daubenmire defended him.

"With the exception of the cross-burning episode. ... I believe John Freshwater is teaching the values of the parents in the Mount Vernon school district," he told The Columbus Dispatch for a story published Friday.

Several students interviewed by investigators described Freshwater, who has been employed by the school district located 40 miles northeast of Columbus for 21 years, as a great guy and their favorite teacher.

But Lynda Weston, the district's director of teaching and learning, told investigators that she has dealt with complaints about Freshwater for much of her 11-year term at the district, the report said.

A former superintendent, Jeff Maley, said he tried to find another position for Freshwater but couldn't because he was certified only in science, the report said.

Freshwater used a science tool known as a high-frequency generator to burn images of a cross on students' arms in December, the report said. Freshwater told investigators he simply was trying to demonstrate the device on several students and described the images as an "X," not a cross. But pictures show a cross, the report said.

Other findings show that Freshwater taught that carbon dating was unreliable to argue against evolution.

Yeah, sure, if we ignore the multiple examples of child abuse and assault & battery, he's just a swell guy and a model example of the family values of Ohio parents.

Are you f*cking kidding me? o_O

[Japher]

I'm an Ohio parent, and I'm all for branding.

[Space05us]

"With the exception of the cross-burning episode. ...

[DRoseDARs]

Yeah, it's not often that something literally elicits the "jaw-dropping" reaction from me. That line did it.

[Japher]

I think they mean branding, not actual burning of a cross... but you never know round here.

[DRoseDARs]

Oh, I know what was meant. The usual meaning of "cross-burning" hadn't crossed my mind until you mentioned it.

[Imran Siddiqui]

Originally posted by Space05us

[DanS]

This guy's an idiot. 9 more years and he would have had a sweet pension.

[Zkribbler]

I believe the teacher more than I believe the school.

"Branding" is a loaded word and used here inaccurately. There was no permanent scarring, as implied by "branding." Rather, the "x" or cross disappeared in a few weeks.

I tried to find some information as to what a "high-frequency generator" is. I found lots of sites selling them but not much in the way of an explanation. One beauty supply site says a high-frequency generator will cause tingling to the face or scalp, so this doesn't sound like much of a torture device.

" Lynda Weston, the district's director of teaching and learning, told investigators that she has dealt with complaints about Freshwater for much of her 11-year term at the district." This sounds inconsistent with the reports of several students saying Freshwater was their favorite teacher.

Note: He didn't attack evolution on the grounds that it wasn't consistent with the Bible. Rather, he challenged the accuracy of carbon dating. Questioning scientific assumptions is something that scientists are supposed to do.

As the opening article says, this guy is entitled to a hearing. So let's see how this shakes out.

[Seedle]

I agree with Zkribbler in that there may be more to this story than we are told in the article. I can imagine a scenario where to get student interest, this teacher offers to make an image on your skin with this instrument. I would certainly have volunteered. I would then have thrown a fit when he made a cross (if he made a cross), but the mere fact that he is using a device to temporarily discolor student's skin hardly seems like a terminable offense. The article mentions a picture of the drawing in question, wish we could see it to judge for ourselves.

Also, the article doesn't specify what precisely the law suit is about. Are the student and his parents suing because of WHAT was drawn, or because of the mere fact of the drawing, or because the drawing lasted so long, or because they're money-seeking douche bags?

However, I do disagree with Zkribbler that Weston's report of complaints is inconsistent with students reporting his as their favorite teacher. Heck, one of the teachers in my high school was really popular with most students, but I had enough of a problem with her to call her a ****ing **** in class, to her face, loud enough that the neighboring classes could hear. So just because some, or even most, students like a teacher doesn't mean no one will complain.

Also, while scientists are supposed to challenge assumptions, there are some problems with what he is doing in regards to evolution. First, I wouldn't exactly call carbon dating an assumption. Yes, I have heard of issues of contaminated samples messing with results, but I haven't heard anyone say the basic principle isn't sound. Second, even if we grant that carbon dating is unreliable, there is much more evidence for evolution than carbon dating. In fact, "carbon dating is incorrect" is one of the weakest counters to evolution in my opinion. Third, if he says evolution is wrong, (and teaching kids this isn't going to help them if they go into science in college) to what mechanism does he assign the origin of species? Does he say no one has any clue? Because I haven't heard any other scientific theories for this, and that is what a science teacher should be discussing.

Oh, and Japher, where in Ohio do you live?

[snoopy369]

I generally think I'd, at least pending more evidence, believe the teacher as well. Inconsistencies and obviously loaded terminology tell me something's amiss here.

[Theben]

Without any direct quotes from the teacher, it's hard to say. As for the 'cross' incident I hard it hard to believe that any student would sit still long enough for him to burn a straight line in his arm, let alone a cross.
Any teacher, no matter how good, will have students that don't like them.
I'll reserve judgement until after the hearing.